Most of the coverage of the Costa Concordia disaster at the moment seems to be focusing on the Italian cruise ship’s captain and his douchey behavior, which involved not only running the ship aground but also abandoning ship prestissimo while passengers remained trapped on board.
MRAs, by contrast, are using the tragedy as an excuse to rail against the notion of “women and children first” and, of course, to make jokes about women drowning.
Now, the Titanic aside, “women and children first” isn’t now, and hasn’t ever really been, the standard way to evacuate those on a sinking ship, though many in the public — including some of those who were on board the Costa Concordia – seem to believe that it is. (See here for more details on how evacuations are typically handled these days; generally only those with mobility problems are given special treatment.)
In the case of this particular evacuation, some on board apparently tried to enforce an informal “women and children” policy, but many men weren’t willing to wait.
What’s got some MRAs in a snit is that some people, in the media and online, are calling these dudes cowards. In The Daily Mail, a right-wing British tabloid, A N Wilson wrote:
[I]n our day, with the advent of feminism and the professional woman, chivalry and manners are considered stuffy and old-fashioned.
As the father of three daughters, I do not, with a single fibre of my being, wish to go back to a time when women could not have the vote or get a university degree. Nor do I, surrounded by extremely strong-charactered and intelligent women in my family and among my friends, feel tempted to regard women as the frail sex.
But the fact remains that there is a longing among most men to protect women and children, and chivalry is simply a manifestation of that longing.
And whatever transpires about the reason for the Costa Concordia disaster, the disappearance of a chivalric code is a sorry reflection on society today.
This is not what you’d call a feminist argument; it’s a traditionalist argument, published in a tabloid rag that’s generally quite hostile to feminism.
Nonetheless, some MRAs are using the Costa Concordia disaster as an opportunity to deliver a big “told you so!” to the … imaginary feminists who live in their head.
Over on The Spearhead, where one familiar commenter actually described Wilson’s Daily Mail article as “feminist,” guest poster Lyn87 wrote:
The MRM is getting more vocal, and a lot of guys are now saying, “You wanted equality. This is what it looks like.” And they are saying it aloud and in public. Even a few women chimed in, saying that men have no obligation to die for women if women want equality. (Somehow I suspect there wasn’t much, “I am woman, hear me roar, watch me drown” on the Costa Concordia itself, but hey, it’s a start.)
MRAs: Always up-to-the-minute with their pop culture references!
This post was helpfully illustrated with a stock photo of a woman drowning.
Commenters got in their digs as well.
Keyster riffed on Lyn87’s incredibly au courant Helen Reddy reference:
I am woman hear me…blurp….rah…gurgle…raha…ffftt…orr…roar…gurgle…help me…somebody…fffft…please…blurp…help…help me please!
Aharon told both ladies and fish what’s what:
I eat fish. Fish don’t eat me. My life is too precious to sacrifice it so some spoiled bitch can have a pussy pass into the life boats.
Anti Idiocy got all hypothetical-cruise-ship tough guy on us:
Anyone who attempts to keep me on a sinking ship because of the genitals with which I was born is attempting to murder me. I have the right to respond accordingly.
And Thomas Tell-truth kicked chivalry – not to mention basic human decency — to the ocean floor:
Equality means that when the ship is going down and you are a woman, you had better get out of my way or you are going to drown with my footprints on your back.
Apparently Thomas Tell-truth is actually George Costanza:
Jeb, meanwhile, offered a more scientific rationalization for being a complete douchenozzle:
As far as I’ve heard, the one and only sport in which women naturally out-do men is endurance swimming. Women are also more bouyant, and as survivalists will explain, women float easiest on their backs (making it easy to breathe while expending minimal energy) whereas men float easiest in “the dead man’s float” (ie. face down, head in the water) and must expend more energy to stay alive. Furthermore, women have more body-fat than men which insulates them better against aquatic dangers such as hypothermia.
Given all these factors it is quite rational for men to pick women up by the seat of their pants and toss them overboard to make way for men and children to safely be rowed ashore on the lifeboats.
It’s all about doing the right thing and saving lives, after all.
MRA humor is very sophisticated indeed.
EDITED TO ADD: The Spearhead has put up a followup post, once again taking aim at imaginary “lifeboat feminists,” though the only person the post cites lamenting the end of “women and children” is Rich Lowry from the National Review (not a feminist publication).
316 women and 338 men survived the Titanic. An equal amount of men and women. :3
Yes who do bottle up tend to commit suicide. But expressing emotions doesn’t necessarily help because it doesn’t solve any problem in and of itself.
But it does allow you to get help. 🙂
I lived most of my life bottling it up and “sucking it up” just like you said btw… and I was really really depressed and tried to kill myself twice. >_> I lived the very philosophy you espouse as being good. It takes a serious serious toll…
@ Ami Angelwings
“He said that “sucking it up” is good for survivability… but depression and suicide would seem to be bad for survivability.
(also sucking up physical injuries is a bad idea… the current issue with concussions in hockey and people hiding concussions and getting successive concussions and getting serious brain issues in their older age for example)”
Sucking it up is tool for survivability. That is why so many men do it. Because it is a self defense mechanism that works. If it didn’t work people wouldn’t be using it. However it doesn’t work for ever.
Different methods are used.
Men who are open and venerable to everything and everyone usually end up dead quicker then those who try to make do.
“316 women and 338 men survived the Titanic. An equal amount of men and women. :3”
Also, most of the women weren’t happy about leaving their husbands, brothers, friends behind. It’s not like they all went, “Right so, best of luck swimming back to shore!”
Sucking it up is tool for survivability. That is why so many men do it. Because it is a self defense mechanism that works. If it didn’t work people wouldn’t be using it.
So if people are doing something it means it works?
Does that apply to feminism too? o_O
“But expressing emotions doesn’t necessarily help because it doesn’t solve any problem in and of itself.”
Yes it does. There are professionals for that very purpose.
I would half agree. Expressing emotions is an important step, and, for some, it’s enough. For most therapy clients, however, some kind of problem solving or change in thinking is also necessary for lasting change. I think they are two parts of the same process. Just my 2 cents. 🙂
Of course, everyone is different.
Men who are open and venerable to everything and everyone usually end up dead quicker then those who try to make do.
Really? How do you know this?
“Men who are open and venerable to everything and everyone usually end up dead quicker then those who try to make do.”
I didn’t realise men get killed after talking about their bad day =o
@ Captain Bathrobe
“Regarding men and suicide: I think this is something that bears repeating. Emotions will not be denied. Sooner or later, they will need to be dealt with, or they will come back to bite you in the ass. Even police departments are starting to recognize the importance of proving mental health services to cops who use deadly force. Obviously, a police officer can’t be wearing zir heart on zir sleeve while on duty, but failing to deal with emotions that arise as a result of their work will usually not end well.
There’s an awesome book on male depression by Terrance Real, aptly titled I Don’t Want to Talk About It. Well worth a read.”
How does talking about a problem solve the problem?
Tell me using 1.0.
Lets use an example.
Someone gets rejected. They can talk about it to their friends but they are still got rejected. Talking about it didn’t solve anything.
Now I guess you could make the argument that talking about it releases stress. But does it really?
I find not. I can talk about how hungry I am to you (which I am as I’ve been writing for a while) but actually DOING something (like going to fridge) is practical and actionable.
Men who are open and venerable to everything and everyone usually end up dead quicker then those who try to make do.
False dichotomy. Being able to “suck it up” when necessary does not preclude the ability to be aware of, manage, and process emotions when in a safer situation. In fact, I would argue that the ability to do both as needed is far more adaptive than just being good at suppressing emotions.
“Someone gets rejected. They can talk about it to their friends but they are still got rejected. Talking about it didn’t solve anything. Now I guess you could make the argument that talking about it releases stress. But does it really?”
Yes. It’s called venting.
“316 women and 338 men survived the Titanic. An equal amount of men and women. :3″
Also, most of the women weren’t happy about leaving their husbands, brothers, friends behind. It’s not like they all went, “Right so, best of luck swimming back to shore!”
No. It was 80% women and 20% men.
That’s not really what the dichotomy is tho o_O
If we have to use your hunger analogy, it’s more like if you know you feel something but you don’t know what, your stomach hurts and you’re not sure what it is. If you told people they might help you realize you’re hungry and then you know that you should get something to eat 😀 Vs if you sit there and just clutch your stomach and then you collapse.
Or a better analogy would be if you feel a pain in your body and you suck it up, vs that you admit you feel pain and talk to your doctor about the pain and where it hurts and how much 😀
No. It was 80% women and 20% men.
Now we’re talking percentages? o_O
Equal results: An equal amount of men and women are allowed onto the both.
That was an equal amount.
The boats had an equal amount of men and women.
Captain Bathrobe
““I would half agree. Expressing emotions is an important step, and, for some, it’s enough. For most therapy clients, however, some kind of problem solving or change in thinking is also necessary for lasting change. I think they are two parts of the same process. Just my 2 cents.
Of course, everyone is different.”
I’m a little more on this camp. However there are thousands of women (mostly) everyday that talk about problems. What does talking do. Not much.
They can talk about their boyfriends leaving them. But that doesn’t change the boyfriend. It is to try to feel better after the even occurred by finding like minded people who can help you.
Yeah, I guess talking about problems doesn’t solve anything. Time for me to find another profession. Also, all those meetings people have been attending? Forget about it. Talking doesn’t solve anything. Congressional debate? Seminar classes? Court proceedings? Useless! Talking solves nothing!
From the dawn of time, people have talked over problems in order to solve them. Have you really thought this through?
“No. It was 80% women and 20% men.”
No. The numbers of survivalists were roughly equal between genders but there were much less women on the Titanic anyway.
“No. It was 80% women and 20% men.
Now we’re talking percentages? o_O
Equal results: An equal amount of men and women are allowed onto the both.
That was an equal amount.
The boats had an equal amount of men and women.”
http://www.anesi.com/titanic.htm
http://www.ithaca.edu/staff/jhenderson/titanic.html
From the dawn of time, people have talked over problems in order to solve them.
Exactly xD
Talking about problems is a step in solving them. But if you don’t talk at all, then you don’t take that step.
Sometimes when you talk, you find there wasn’t even a problem in the first place.
If you have financial problems, trying to solve it yourself while hiding that you have a problem could lead to it being much much worse, rather than admitting you need help and going to find an accountant, or asking your friends to help you out with some money or etc 🙂 Exploring options vs “GRRRR SUCK IT UP”
Yup, that’s where I got my numbers from 😀
You said you wanted equal amounts of men and women to survive. They did.
I’m a little more on this camp. However there are thousands of women (mostly) everyday that talk about problems. What does talking do. Not much.
They can talk about their boyfriends leaving them. But that doesn’t change the boyfriend. It is to try to feel better after the even occurred by finding like minded people who can help you.
It can help people sort through their feelings in order to have a better experience next time. Talking sets all kinds of cognitive processes in motion. I agree, though, that some forms of talk are more productive than others. But it’s not really for you, or me, to judge how helpful it is for others to talk about their problems. What seems useless to you can be extraordinarily helpful to others.
“Yeah, I guess talking about problems doesn’t solve anything. Time for me to find another profession. Also, all those meetings people have been attending? Forget about it. Talking doesn’t solve anything. Congressional debate? Seminar classes? Court proceedings? Useless! Talking solves nothing!
From the dawn of time, people have talked over problems in order to solve them. Have you really thought this through?”
You are taking the solving problems into other areas like politics. Talking about problems can GENERATE ideas to address problems which can be solved through action.
I was talking about men guarding their emotions vs women talking about them. This is different, in terms of context.